Skip to main content
12:30 am
>> okay. thank you. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you. out of curiosity i don't know -- if doesn't really matter but i am wondering how long -- is it a separate parcel i am sure and probably been a separate parcel for qhiet a while. >> it is. >> and portolla had houses moved around and when they widened portolla and it's been a while so i have a couple questions i guess for mr. lynn if i could ask you something. >> yes, sir. >> what month of the year was the picture taken with the sunsetting in your -- >> in that window. september 24. >> september 24. >> almost falls on my birthday. >> okay. so kind of the middle of the year. >> i have been watching it for
12:31 am
a long time. >> yeah, i do the same thing out the bedroom window and the sun moves across the sky in different directions in the seasons and one blocks off the sun in the extreme winder months and the rest of the year, so i am trying to figure out. this might come and go depending on the blockage of this particular house. >> i could show you the pictures again. where her house is it's going to block 100% of my shot of the horizon and the sun from that direction. >> [inaudible], when it gets -- >> the last -- probably the last couple of hours, or hour of setting sun. >> okay. >> and portolla was widened in 1959, 1960. i'm the third generation living there and i
12:32 am
have photos of them doing that. my dad's photos, not mine. >>i would be interested in that another day. well with that being said i guess i am talking to staff about the discrepancy. we had a discrepancy and there was a measurement taken and now it's changed and how much discretion are we allowed to give? i guess we talked about a difference of 6-inch of about five and a half foot difference project -- dr requester is saying. i'm not sure if he is accurate about that.
12:33 am
>> it appears three and a half difference between the two adjaisept homes so therefore the initial notice is off about roughly three and a half feet. it shows them lining up there, the base of their roof heights were going to be parallel according to the original notice so roughly about three and a half feet. >> and is that a big enough error that we ask that it be changed or not? >> the thing is it is a code compliant house. it's noticed. it's just a matter of its representation on the plan was not correct. the actual framing and dimensions on the approved plan are essentially identical. it's just how it was placed on the site and showing the representation of the two properties was not correct, but
12:34 am
the dimensions of the house are not changing from one what originally approved if i am making myself clear. >> no. i am understanding what you're saying and representation relative to portolla drive and mr. lynn's house was different -- >> correct. one building was framed -- from mr. lynn's perspective and expecting this resident to be equal to the neighboring house and now three and a half feet taller. >> the other question i have would be for project sponsor but this has to do with the design guidelines and i am certainly appreciative of the st. francis wood design association because the renderings that i see of the proposed house are very tasteful and keeping with the rest of st. francis wood we could take a clue from some of the design guidelines in the future on our projects but in any case i am
12:35 am
wondering if it's all right if we make it a couple feet lower or 3 feet lower as he asked and hip roof or flat portion. it would have to have a gaibl but it wouldn't come to a point. >> as i understand st. frarnis homeowner association they typically review projects before they come to the city. they have their own internal review process. we rarely get a project -- a dr project filed on a project in st. francis woods. it rarely happens because they do this. if changes are made to the approved plans i under the assumption that the project sponsor has to return to them. >>i am sure they could. looking at the project further west on portolla and i don't know if that is the term a hit roof and
12:36 am
gabble and has a flat portion and i'm not sure if that can be done and i'm not sure of the amount of the gaibl on it and able to shave a couple of feet off and more into conformity of what was represented but i will see what the other commissioners have to say. >> commissioner moore. >>i would like the commissioners to look at the parcel map to see that the dr requesters map is south from the proposed subject property. the reason i am saying this is it's about views and not light but about views and as much as i like to protect it the house in front of us today has made concessions that comes out of the san francisco
12:37 am
neighborhood discussions [inaudible] portolla drive and you have stately homes and setback from the street and individually designed homes on large lots speak for themselves, kind of stately neighborhood . the fact that the proposed building primarily has relatively low ceiling heights for this building type is already a major concession to keeping the building not too imposing or impacting on adjoining properties and i assume they had the dr request's house in mind also. we also have the additional lot 37 where someone else in the future might be building. what i can tell it's a buildable lot. that's not part of the discussion here. i myself would agree with the
12:38 am
neighborhood design review there is nothing exceptional extraordinary about what is in front of us. that is already a pretty tightly designed building given the other things the applicant has to look at and i would move to approve, not change the roof form and in the neighborhood where you have stepping properties and extremely important to have the same and not a fake slope roof but let this project move forward as it is proposed. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah, and looking at the plans i agree that the pitch of the gable is -- 7 feet so you don't have a lot to play there because it's going to be pretty flat if you take 3 feet off of it and the heights of the floors are 10 and nine so you lose a little bit and given the height of the rest of the houses in the neighborhood they're fairly low
12:39 am
will ceilings. >> on the motion to not take dr. commissioner antonini. >> aye. >> commissioner hillis. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya. >> aye. >> commissioner president fong. >> aye. >> so moved unanimously five to zero. that takes you to the last agenda item number 17 at 1587 18th avenue request for discretionary review. this is abbreviated dr. >> good evening planning commission. [inaudible] washington southwest commuter. project site is located at 1587 18th avenue. the existing resident is two story home april 60 feet. >> >> in length. the proposal is within the residence and 15 feet
12:40 am
from the wall and from the rear wall -- [inaudible]. this alteration will add 963 feet to the overall size of the residence, and the rear setback on the new third story will be used as a roof deck. dr was filed by a neighbor at 1140 walton. this property is across the street from the subject property. they have submitted letters of opposition which i have at this hearing. the residential design team reviewed the project and the concerns by the dr filer. based on the giens a proposed third story addition setback from the building wall is appropriate. subject dwelling. also the project result in no significant impact scale along the block.
12:41 am
therefore the planning department determines the third story will not create impact nor demonstrate exceptional or extraordinary circumstance. planning commission should not take discretionary review. that concludes my presentation. i am happy to take any questions from the commission. >> thank you. dr requester. >> commissioner fong, commissioners thank you for hearing this. >> if you could introduce yourself. >> i want to make a simple point to begin with. one is the -- can we have the overhead? the
12:42 am
first point is -- side ways. the first point is that the project sponsors would like you to think that there's neighborhood support for this. the truth is we have submitted 56 letters of opposition from neighbors along the 151600 block and i understand that the proponents have submitted just 12, only four of which are -- 11, four of which live on the 1500 or 1600 block and one of the four is the owner itself so there are 56 versus three in the neighborhood supporting this. the second point we want to make is that the project sponsors would like us to believe that there's nothing special about
12:43 am
this block. you're looking at it right there and the line coming down from the top left is pointing at 1587. the planning department itself, the experts who do their historic resource evaluation say on page four that a small neighborhood cluster with this type and style of housing would be significant and qualify as a historic district, but unfortunately the builder himself is not considered a master builder, but the point i want to make there is that this is a visually unique neighborhood cluster of nine buildings in a row that share common reasons of expression. they're all the same height and conform to the site topography as you can see there. they
12:44 am
have a specific proportionatity to width to depth to height and one to one and there is a side still well on the houses. they all have flat roof lines and some with pits and are classic examples of the marina style home so by definition this project is about making changes to that facade that you're seeing there, that street scape. i think by definition there is an impact. it's out of context to add a third story in the immediate context of nine other immediately adjacent buildings considered significant and historic aside from the builder, so that's the first point. the second point i want to make would be 18a. there is still one unanswered question. it's an important one. how high
12:45 am
relatively is the third story to the adjacent buildings? to be in context with the adjacent buildings there needs to be proportion. the middle building there, the third building from the corner -- there are two buildings to the left and i guess that would be six others to the right of this marina style unique neighborhood cluster. as you can see 1587 is already two to 3 feet higher than the buildings to its immediate sides. the front elevation on sheet a31 tells the new structure would be taken feet 10 inches total so by doing the math they're. >> >> adding 10 feet and 2 inches
12:46 am
and not 8 feet that is being presented to you by the project sponsor, so that's the second thing, so in essence when we add the 8 feet to the existing height of that building the new building becomes more than 50% higher than the immediate adjacent building. if we go by what the plan says it's actually 10 feet higher and that would make it almost 13 feet higher than the immediate adjacent structures. that is almost [inaudible] percent higher so i think on the face of it it's out of context and has with the immediately adjoining structures, and has a visual impact on the neighborhood so i ask that you deny the permit. >> that is your five minutes. thank you. is there any speakers in favor of the dr?
12:47 am
>> my name is [inaudible] young. i live diagonally kroodz from the proposed addition. i am -- even though i am new to the city of san francisco i moved year two years ago from massachusetts i have fallen in love with the city like everybody else, and the reason we are here today, all my neighbors is we care deeply about our neighborhood. we have a 18th avenue committee and i want to thank you for your valuable time and listening to us giving our point of view. it is been a long road to getting here. getting a discretionary review is not a easy thing. the reason we got here is because
12:48 am
we're very committed to at least giving our point of view and see this would destroy the neighborhood character. as you can see from the pictures, the exhibits that were presented, the street has a number of homes that are uniform in height, and the proposed building would be sticking out like a sore thumb. the block face is similar and we find it charm wg a lot of character. my husband and i bought in this neighborhood two years ago precisely because of this visual impact and charm. we define a neighborhood what is in the immediate vicinity and what is visual. this gives it characteristic and uniqueness [inaudible] 30 houses know down the block or another street. i think the project sponsor will say look at this house built
12:49 am
with three stories and this house but none of them are [inaudible] in the immediate vicinity and we benign our neighborhood what is visual. if this allowed to go through it would be out of context with the surroundings and make it difficult for the planning commission to say no to the next proposal. like the arm's race and building up and building and if one neighbor can build another neighbor will build and will destroy the city block by block. [inaudible] and forever change our neighborhood character and visual impact. we hope that the planning commission will not allow the wants of one family to supersede the interest and desires of the whole neighborhood. we have 49 neighbors who wrote letters of opposition to the proposed
12:50 am
addition. we have seven emails opposing the addition and we have two letters opposing the addition. [inaudible] our city been able -- >> thank you. i am afraid your time is up. >> okay. >> thank you very much. >> if you want to submit that can you do that. >> i'm sorry? >> if you want to submit what you are reading you can put it there. >> i just have one more sentence. as a family -- >> thank you. next speaker in favor of the dr. >> good evening commissioners. my name is ken shaffer. i live at 1600 18th avenue. recently were visited by a friend who was an architect and retired city planner and he commented "what a nice neighborhood you live in" and taken by the character of
12:51 am
the buildings around us and this character we have to look at and preserve. it's not as fancy as the painted ladies you are familiar with in san francisco that others outside of san francisco would know about, but we have our own charm in the neighborhood and unless we project it, it will be gone. first you have a house one story higher than every other house on the block. then you have half dozen housing that are higher and you ask now it's a 44-foot limit. how high can i go? if there is no point where you say it's out of scale. here we have a perfectly uniform block and if you can't say it's out of scale for the third story there is no scale consideration at all so for these things i would like to say consider carefully. you have to able to say this is the easiest situation in terms of
12:52 am
putting it out of scale development down. the first time, the first step. after that it becomes harder and harder. after that you have request for four stories high but within the 40-foot limit and you can't say it's out of scale because of the third story houses all around it. thank you for your time. >> thank you. additional speakers. >> president of the planning commission and all other planning commissioners, i appreciate the opportunity speaking with you. my name is arnoldizeen berg. my wife and i are disabled and live on lawton street and kiddie corner from 18th avenue and it's already difficult to someone who is
12:53 am
disabled to even park a car in front of the house. it's really difficult. if you approve one more structure along the streets it adds one story each person afterwards their neighbors will say "well, they can do it. we should do it too" so they will come to you and ask for a variance to be able to build a third story onto their house. what happens is the neighborhood is changing. if you approve an addition to this house you will change the nature of the neighborhood. traffic will increase. there will be larger multiple families living in higher structures. we will be as a neighborhood, a
12:54 am
neighborhood without a character. a neighborhood without the neighbors all knowing each other. a neighborhood which isn't a neighborhood because the neighborhood is supposed to be knowing your neighbor. a neighborhood is supposed to be being able to look and see that this is a unique area. it's unique, not only by the hin hab tants but it's always unique by the character of the construction in the neighborhood. you yourself just earlier mentioned the st. francis woods area how it was controlled and setback and homes were built beautifully. that's because that neighborhood was built in a unique way and it's kept its character. when you live in a neighborhood we want the character to remain the same. we want to look out over
12:55 am
the homes and see that they're nice. we want to see the historic view. that's all i have to say as an inhabitant it's difficult if everything changes. >> thank you. any additional? >> good evening. my name is [inaudible]. i live across that building, what you try to extend at 1587 18th avenue. what i like to say is every city in the world, and especially in the united states city, has their own character. depends where you're going. it doesn't mean you can feel how the structure can see what city you are. if
12:56 am
you're going to brooklyn there is structure 10 stairs to every single house, building [inaudible] all that i see. i travel around the world. every city has its own face. here i live in my house from 1986. it's a small period of time of course, but it's still enough time to learn the neighborhood and learn who is around you and all these things, but now if we extend it's only one house in front of me will be extended, and if this will be extended it's going to change the whole street what i have in front of me. the whole avenue will be different, and time i am against
12:57 am
this construction and change the character. [inaudible] in the 20th avenue which was five, six years ago. it was built by permission -- not by permission but you have like a [inaudible] one house is three story. the other house is two story and then same thing and one story building and next to him is three story building and the whole avenue between sirk ham and lawton it's unbelievable. it's different but for them -- we like to preserve our city where we live and we like to keep that character what we have in this place what it is now. okay. thank you for your attention. >> thank you. next speaker please.
12:58 am
>> good evening. i thank you in advance for your attention and attention. i am irene [inaudible] and i'm the daughter of [inaudible] and i drew up in that home. >> >> it's a single family home. if potentially this is approved for the fourth addition it could change the landscape in a different route. it could open up the block that i live on to be did -- duplexes and obviously would change the landscape and the character and the parking required for duplexes. right now it stands as a single family dwelling and with that said it provided me a wonderful environment to be raised in. thank you for your time and attention. >> next speaker. >> good evening. i am janet
12:59 am
hoses -- >> could somebody move the mic? thank you. >> i am here to beg you not to allow destruction of our immediate neighborhood by the architectural defacement of several blocks of well defined beautiful homes. there are not houses on the market at this time. it shouldn't be hard to find a larger home without disturbing the tranquility of these blocks of 18th avenue. the neighborhood has survived the changes of many that have made a hodgepodge of other neighborhoods, and so should be protected. i have lived here more than 55 years so would really like to see

tv
[untitled]
January 12, 2013 12:30am-1:00am PST

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 4, San Francisco 4, Mr. Lynn 3, Antonini 3, Fong 2, Moore 2, Francis Wood 1, Hillis 1, Dr Requester 1, Francis 1, Francis Woods 1, Sugaya 1, Walton 1, Arnoldizeen Berg 1, United States City 1, The City 1, Brooklyn 1, Massachusetts 1, Lawton 1, Ken Shaffer 1
Network SFGTV
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 89 (615 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 528
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color